Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site • Hacker News Board

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#11

Post by pmontra » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:02 PM UTC

jcoffland wrote: post #5

yummybear wrote: post #2

What a shame. The only consolation, if any, is that they are not the first ones to crash on Mars. If I remember correctly the historic chances of landing successfully on Mars is about 50/50.

The chances of landing are 100%.

Some landers failed to reach Mars and crash land. Check the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_Mars

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#12

Post by BurningFrog » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

The main mission of this expedition is the Trace Gas Orbiter: http://exploration.esa.int/mars/46475-trace-gas-orbiter/

"the Trace Gas Orbiter will be deployed to detect a wide range of atmospheric trace gases (such as methane, water vapour, nitrogen oxides, acetylene), with an improved accuracy of three orders of magnitude compared to previous measurements."

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#13

Post by beamatronic » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

It is so bad ass that when we have a question about something that happened on another planet we can just point one of our other robots' cameras at the site!

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#14

Post by HarryHirsch » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

jcoffland wrote: post #6

Trial run? Sounds like the spin machine at work to me. I wonder what a trial run to Mars costs these days.

Back in 1997, Mars Pathfinder was 175 million USD. They did try new entry-descent-landing techniques in preparation for Spirit/Opportunity, but the scientific return was pretty weak. It was a demonstrator mission, also for faster-better-cheaper, but we all know how well that works.

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#15

Post by simias » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:14 PM UTC

jcoffland wrote: post #6

Trial run? Sounds like the spin machine at work to me. I wonder what a trial run to Mars costs these days.

I heard them saying that before the crash though, so it's not just trying to downplay the failure. From what I understand Schiaparelli could only do a relatively small amount of experiments and only for a handful of days before the battery ran out.

Still, even if it's "just" a test run it means they need to correct their copy by 2020. I hope they'll be able to figure out what went wrong and why.

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#16

Post by Cthulhu_ » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:14 PM UTC

njharman wrote: post #10

jcoffland wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The chances of landing are 100%.

I believe rocket scientists make a distinction between landing and impacting.

Different intensities of lithobraking.

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#17

Post by dwightgunning » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:14 PM UTC

skrap wrote: post #8

yummybear wrote: post #2

What a shame. The only consolation, if any, is that they are not the first ones to crash on Mars. If I remember correctly the historic chances of landing successfully on Mars is about 50/50.

Just about! For lots of fun info, check out the interplanetary Expensive Hardware Lob League: https://www.strudel.org.uk/lob/

Ha! This deserves some credit. The tone of the writing makes me think of Starship Troopers. Very tongue in cheek and very funny.

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#18

Post by nicholasjon » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:20 PM UTC

yummybear wrote: post #2

What a shame. The only consolation, if any, is that they are not the first ones to crash on Mars. If I remember correctly the historic chances of landing successfully on Mars is about 50/50.

Reminds of the "Seven Minutes of Terror" video that NASA put out ahead of the Curiosity landing explaining how they intended to make it safely to the surface.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki_Af_o9Q9s

(Note: I get goosebumps every time I watch this, absolutely amazing problem solving.)

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#19

Post by nixos » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:24 PM UTC

UseStrict wrote: post #7

jcoffland wrote: post #6

Trial run? Sounds like the spin machine at work to me. I wonder what a trial run to Mars costs these days.

Well their actual mission was the ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter. Since they were sending hardware to Mars orbit anyways, they decided to try and attempt a landing. The rover was not designed to last very long - 7 days battery. Their actual high quality lab on wheels will be going out in 2020.

Yes, the point wasn't the lander but the _landing_ .

If the landing works, they can try an expensive rover in 2020. Now, they can fix what they think broke, but they're never sure until it (fails to) land.

Re: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter views Schiaparelli landing site

#20

Post by dwidget » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 6:28 PM UTC

pmontra wrote: post #11

jcoffland wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The chances of landing are 100%.

Some landers failed to reach Mars and crash land. Check the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_Mars

He means that whether it crashes or not, it's a landing.

However there are projects that completely miss their target and just float in space, so even then it's not 100%.